"I'll do anything to maintain my health": How women aged 65 to 94 perceive, experience, and cope with their aging bodies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explored how physically active women perceived, experienced, and coped with their aging bodies, and examined their perceptions of the utility of self-compassion to manage aging body-related changes. Findings from a thematic analysis of interviews with 21 women aged 65 to 94 revealed that they were appreciative of how their bodies worked and accepting of their physical limitations, yet concurrently critical of their body's functionality and appearance. Participants engaged in physical activity and healthy eating to maintain their health and body functionality, yet also used diet, hair styling, anti- aging creams, makeup, physical activity, and clothing to manage their appearances. To assess their bodies (in)adequacies, they engaged in upward or downward social comparisons with others their age. Participants perceived self-compassion for the aging body to be idealistic and contextual. Findings highlight the importance of health and body functionality in influencing the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral management of the aging body.Acknowledgments: This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and by the Killam Laureates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".